all.

and has its european partners in the. introducing border controls for the past time infuriating germany where a minister has urged holiday makers boycott its neighbor so in theory the abandonment of a bedrock of the you could mean distorters more travel restrictions to come else way and. the dutch court has ruled the netherlands responsible for the death of three muslims in this ripper need some nine hundred ninety five of the country's peacekeepers forced them out of a un protected compound into the hands of both me and said troops compensation is to be paid to relatives some continuing legal action against the community held by the yuan which critics say should have been on trial and stepped in. and leave their claims to have intercepted two vessels with belgian and weapons in intended for the rebels say nato is breaking the u.n.

involved sending arms to the country officials said the weapons came from contact with france up to now the only country openly admitting to have supplied arms to insurgent forces. as the headlines up next states that i want to show from our washington studios of ghana's stan and the u.n. report which says that violence days on the up a statistic seemingly not of huge public interest. welcome to the loner show where you'll get the real headlines with none of the mercy we're going live to washington d.c. now and i will talk about a u.n. report on the war in afghanistan that directly contradicts what military officials are telling us lawmakers so who should we believe then we'll show you a blatant example of hypocrisy by the white house in the double standard that they

have when it comes to leaking classified information and debt ceiling madness time is running out and republicans that won't budge so can somebody believe tell us what is wrong with these people were to have all of that and more for you tonight including a dose of happy hour but first let's take a look at what the mainstream media has missed. this is the end for the casey anthony trial my friends today a verdict was reached and it was read out loud. a stunning. jaw dropping moment they saw the death penalty against this woman and she got convicted of four misdemeanors this is a historic rejection of the prosecution's case the attorney who was once dubbed as somewhat hapless in this process now looks like a genius for basically that's right the case is over benito done so and while the

rest of us are going to be letting out size of relief that we no longer have to endure the nonstop coverage the media is in a bit of a frenzy nancy grace's head i'm sure has exploded by now but you see the thing is that even before this verdict was read today they spent hours going over every little detail about the jury about their deliberation process things that quite frankly nobody gives a crap about it was all an effort just to make sure that they still breathlessly covered the story well they could. well after six hours yesterday the jury is back at work this morning at the casey anthony murder trial put a stop watch on it it was it eight thirty for the two of the deliberations so you have twelve jurors seven women fall from there and two of the women are african-american the others are white the jurors will break for lunch we're told somewhere in her prison blues she's to get into the courthouse and when she goes upstairs her attorneys have several pieces of clothing selected for her we've seen

this throughout the trial really do you really need to spend the top eight minutes of a news show and i mean it was the top of the show talking about how many shirts casey anthony gets to choose from when she goes into the courtroom how many of the jurors are women how many of them are black and i wish they would do the same thing when it's a case where racism is actually a problem just look to states in the south go to texas you'll see it plain and simple in many examples but in the casey anthony trial come on people this is hardly an example of discrimination if anything every single other story out there has been discriminated against by having not been paid attention to because it was a pretty white girl who may or may not have killed her daughter stories like that yes i know that i keep pointing this out it might seem tedious and repetitive but stories like the war in afghanistan the last week we showed you how the mainstream media just completely blatantly ignore general david petraeus being on the hill and testify to take over as director of the cia they also blatantly ignored we try to general john allen who's taking over petraeus is all job testifying on the hill and

listen i know these men don't have the looks of casey anthony but come on people they're only going to be heading our longest war and our intelligence agency anyway if we take one more look at some of the military statistics that came out you can see exactly what petraeus is leaving behind for starters is the whole hearts and minds counterinsurgency strategy now we're just getting back to bombing people from the sky you see since petraeus took over. afghanistan coalition warplanes fired weapons and dropped bombs five thousand eight hundred and thirty one times that's a sixty five percent increase in the twelve months prior to that to even wonder want to know how much those five thousand eight hundred thirty one bombs and weapons cost not to mention of course the lives that may have been lost civilian lives and here's another two that the mainstream television media isn't reporting on about the standing lawyers now suing the cia for its drone strikes in pakistan that have led to civilian deaths don't forget because when you strike something

with lethal force there are consequences and although this particular lawyer. has been to the us and many times before the state department has just prevented him from traveling here for a conference on human rights isn't that nice and fair and democratic of them it's hypocrisy in the mainstream media just turns a blind eye so that's what they miss. so while the mainstream media is ignoring the ramping up of our air campaign in afghanistan they've also missed another big report that quite frankly makes our military commanders out to be big fat liars see last week the un released a quarterly report on the war in afghanistan in the statistics were not pretty violence is up fifty one percent since this time last year so were civilian casualties compared to the spring of two thousand and ten there of twenty percent the number of afghans who've been displaced is up four percent making the number now more than four hundred and thirty five thousand people so it would take those

numbers how many how do we compare that to at which enter general john allen who stated to take over the war command as commander what he said last tuesday in front of a senate panel he said the violence is five percent lower so far this year in comparison to last year so that's exactly the opposite of what the u.n. report has found so is the u.s. military lying and fudging the numbers and when will congress or the white house finally notice joins me to discuss that is jack rice former cia officer and criminal defense attorney jack thanks so much always a pleasure to have you on the show our question so whose word are you going to take here do we believe her tray is and john allen or do we believe the u.s. . well let's face it the u.n. is trying to use very very hard numbers and what we're seeing from the white house what we're seeing from the pentagon is something else entirely and they're trying to make an argument right now regarding where they are going but you know what you can take a look back and see what it is they were arguing in the past the whole concept of

dealing with a counterinsurgency was to put more people on the ground so they could try to address the problems of the people or they've decided they don't want to do that anymore in fact as you just described correctly what we're seeing now is death from the sky just like we did before except for the numbers are increasing dramatically but what the biggest problem that comes out of that is civilian casualties more deaths of innocents and which will do one thing it will drive the populace away from the united states which is one of our biggest problems in the first place well you know one of the interesting things about this if you look at this u.n. report specifically is that each other and this is the part of course of the u.s. military likes to beef up and they like to publicize is that the amount of civilian casualties that have been caused directly at least as far as they now by the u.s. or by coalition forces is down compare the amount of civilian deaths that we've seen from insurgents but it doesn't that kind of division i don't know make the entire point moot because aren't we there to protect civilians supposedly from

insurgents. of course we are that's that's our problem it simply is inconsistent it's the equivalent you know even if you think locally you know anywhere in the united states we saw we're going to is we're going to cut taxes but we're going to raise fees it's all of name game it's all a shell game where you continue to move things around quickly enough and say where's the p is it under this one or is it under that one in this case it doesn't really matter if at the end of the day we are losing if at the end of the day what we're finding is that there are more civilians who are dying more people in the streets of kabul and kandahar and herat mills who are who decided that the americans are the bad guys let's face it at the end of the day we are losing and fundamentally that is our biggest problem regardless of the numbers of people we have on the ground were guards of the number of people we were garda's the number of sorties or the number of predator drones or anything else and you think i mean is this also just specific to this u.s. occupation of afghanistan if you go back to soviet times we didn't see so many

suicide attacks we didn't see so many bombs so why now. well i think there is a bit of a difference and i think part of the problem then if you can call it that is what the soviets were dealing with in many ways or what the americans are dealing with now that's that is true but what makes it different is that there's a perception in the streets that i mean these are people i've spoken with in iraq and in afghanistan and in cairo and in jordan and in the palestinian territories there's this perception if the americans are trying to get the entire region so one thing that happens in certain areas of the middle east will then work its way into other parts and we never saw the likes of i.e.d. used or suicide attacks in afghanistan previously i mean this is a new phenomenon but it's one that has been essentially acquired from what we've seen in places like iraq because it works you know what it really does is it drives the populous away from the americans because the perception that the americans are

failing is highlighted by every successful attack and i guess you know at the end of the day of course for civilians in afghanistan it doesn't matter who is doing the killing as long as people are losing their lives they're still living through the middle of this conflict i'm just curious though so we have the u.n. does a comprehensive report here the military i don't know if we call it comprehensive but they put on their own statistics do you think that there need to be other organizations that really are a report card for the war that really measures some of these numbers or is the u.n. a good tool well i think the u.n. is actually useful but i think what's happened is frequently it becomes sort of if the yotta of those on the right if i don't want to make this a left or right question but i think the more independent numbers you can find the better frequently what we have seen from the dia de is that the deal he is trying to give you a specific number they're trying to spin this story too and so what you're looking for is a more objective truth it is a very very hard thing to find anywhere in the world and when you're dealing with

one of multiple wars going on to find truly objective facts can be very complicated . very very rare indeed so let's talk about you know you and i have of course spoken about the president and the plan for withdrawing the surge at least by summer of two thousand and twelve i guess if we look at these numbers that show the violence has only increased while the surge has been there does that mean that they have failed. of course they fail i mean let's be honest what we're doing now is we're doing exactly what we were doing before what we're doing is we're increasing the numbers of attacks as we have previously and in fact we're ramping them up dramatically compared to where we were before and if you look at the numbers of attacks again and you said this better as well or better than anybody else it doesn't matter who kills your child it doesn't matter who kills your friend or your parent if you're burying them you're going to look around for wherever the the bomb came from and if the americans are so no no no we're here to help who do you think you're going to blame yes we or. do you think that placing more special operations

teams and this is tell me if i'm wrong here but i'm assuming that it's a surge wave that we're going to have more special ops teams that start to at least go in while they might get rid of some of the other troops is that going to be a better strategy at all. well regarding the special ops units there's no question about that in fact one of the things you're going to see when it comes to fudging the numbers from the d o d is this is what they're going to be doing is they're taking out all the support troops that they can and what they're doing they're going to do is keep all of the combat troops and special ops he gets on the ground as possible so you can keep more people in streets more people in the field but it would also does is it actually makes those who are there even more vulnerable the problem again goes back to the numbers of deaths that we're seeing it in a sense and what will happen is that doesn't fix our problem you can put a special ops unit on the ground if you still kill a civilian what you now have is a blood feud where the entire extended family will turn around and say let me get this right and american killed my cousin well guess what no if i wasn't in the war

i am and that's why we continue to lose so how come we don't hear from the white house or from congress about the fact that the pentagon decides to fudge its numbers and even today we see three us sign there is that have an op ed in the new york times saying the troops should get out but all of them should get out in two thousand and twelve but they never mention any of the number funding may never point any fingers are they scared of the pentagon of course they are everybody is afraid to be seen especially the left the left is petrified to be seen as weak on terrorism weak on international security and certainly never want to be seen as anything anti deal deal or even questioning d.o.d. they want to be on the same side but you know i guess the other way of looking at this is there are far too busy fighting about the budget right now or maybe they're all just sitting around watching what happens to casey anthony and i can is that that better myself and we will get into the ridiculousness of this budget fight later on in the show but for now thank you so much jack my pleasure. now speaking

of the military as you know the u.s. has a top secret military base in the u.k. it's called men with hill and since the one nine hundred fifty s. has been a crucial element in surveillance and intelligence gathering however like many u.s. military projects this base is quite expensive it cost ten billion dollars to be exact and its presence doesn't sit well with the locals artie's lore and it has more. here it's a little piece of america in the heart of the u.k.'s yorkshire dales where it's britons who are demanding independence from america this space symbolizes what's wrong with the special relationship between britain and the united states here we have a base that's on u.s. control which the british government and british people have no control menwith hill is the largest intel gathering and surveillance space outside the us there are thirty two satellite dishes housed inside the huge gulf ball structures which can

eavesdrop on telephone calls faxes and e-mails from around the world it's been operational since the one nine hundred sixty s. but now it's set to become part of the controversial missile defense shield to alert the u.s. to any ballistic missiles as in poland and the czech republic where the u.s. also plan to cite bases locals who worry that having the facility here will put the area in danger heightening the risk of an attack by anyone who wants to disable the shield but unlike in eastern europe the government here has put up no fight a toll in fact it doesn't even know what goes on here there isn't a single british official in parliament or in the intelligence services who could give you a full picture of what is happening in this space it's the culmination of former u.s. president ronald reagan's dream as his statue is unveiled in london on monday menwith hill embody soiree can envisage didn't the earlier. born

a missile detection system that was dubbed the star wars program it's secretive based floor away from u.s. soil and some say it's a step towards the u.s. domination and militarization of space people demonstrate here campaigning for the closure of this space and the elbows like his around the country they want to reclaim this london bring it but under the control of the british government and its people it's not working though as men with help becomes part of the missile defense shield it's building another go full satellite structure bringing the total to thirty three despite some local and national opposition growing not reducing the u.s. is influence in europe lower and its altie menwith hill yorkshire. just ahead of wiki leaks goes after two credit card companies in court have won not only return and then the devil standard from the white house they've aggressively target leaders unless that lake comes from inside six hundred pennsylvania avenue to cover that interesting.

issue is that so much to me do you think you should be trying to get more when the united nations tribunals indicted some members of the liberty she has paid for the assassination of the former lebanese prime minister. and. the news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. trying to corporations are old today.

well looks like wiki leaks has finally gathered a legal crew to take on credit card companies visa master card just last week we showed you how julian assange poked fun at master card by spoofing one of its very own commercials people servers and. two hundred dollars in. donations lost due to banking. fifteen million. that it cost to the whole sort of. five hundred thousand dollars. watching the world. series so. priceless. there is well the jokes are now over the now wiki leaks is getting serious as you probably remember when the whistle blowing organization first released its massive stash of diplomatic cables from the us visa mastercard suspended all methods of payment to wiki leaks through their companies so the group sent out a press release through its twitter page so you have those credit card companies have been engaging in a us to backed financial blockade and then they explain that they're suing visa

master card the press release states the company is a coordinated action on december seventh last year to block all credit card transactions to wiki leaks constituted a serious violation of the competition rules of the e.u. furthermore that the actions of these companies have violated danish merchant laws when they terminated the payment services and refused to reinstate that and we should note of the danish law firm representing weiqi weeks's attempted to explain their case to the companies themselves but according to several reports these are mastercard haven't complied and in a recent interview was seen at mastercard stood by their original reasoning stating that company rules prohibit customers from directly or indirectly and gauging in or facilitating any action that's illegal meanwhile we continue to move forward with their suit or request for prosecution has already been filed with the e.u. commission now i for one want to give wiki leaks major kudos. and all this they remembered a very crucial element in this saga that wiki leaks is an international organization

and while they might have exposed some of america's most private information they still serve as a resource for the rest of the world and in that case there was a boy organization has gone to the e.u. to make sure that they can remain protected under international laws but is that going to be enough to stop these a master cards protest of wiki leaks mission well i guess only time will tell. now we've often spoken about the double standard that's applied to leaking classified information and today we have one more glaring example pointed out by salon dot com glenn greenwald and it was big news in the new york times they reported that pakistan's intelligence agency the i.s.i. had ordered the killing of pakistani journalist silliness aat whose body was found weeks ago but how the new york times actually know this just because several senior administration officials speaking on the condition of anonymity of course told them so and in that same piece the new york times a good knowledge of the disclosure of the information in itself could further

aggravate the badly fractured relationship between pakistan and the u.s. it is far as we know it no investigation has been launched no grand jury has been convened in virginia no one is sitting in solitary confinement for passing on this classified information so how do we apply this to the obama administration's war on whistleblowers do they only go after you if it's the secrets that make them look bad or discuss this with me is christopher chambers lecture at georgetown university and author of the blog not turner's revenge chris thanks so much for joining us tonight but he say other blatant example of the double standard that if somebody within the administration who is somewhat of a level you don't get in trouble for leaking anything i mean this is classic or be the rule here and it's been the rule probably for the last fifty sixty seventy years is the one person in the world the leak is local sam. who when where. to whom it is a tool of policy it is a weapon anybody else is not allowed to use it i mean that's the bottom line but so

these are senior administration officials we of course don't really know who that applies to you but if it's a number of them if there are several of them does that mean that somebody had to condone it that somebody within the white house said it's ok to put this information that's that's how that works for me because that's how controls you information whereas if it's an investigative journalist or. we or somebody like bradley manning feeding wiki leaks that's a loose cannon stuff that's you know that justice be done though the heavens may fall stuff we don't want that we want to have control so there's stuff coming from the top the top could mean the state department c d o d or a combination of all of those and how many times have we seen this write to you and united and spoken about an entire book that was there and you got it obama's wars it was full of all these secret you know closed door meetings and yet that gets to be sold on the shelves and in the cases of wiki leaks or people like thomas drake there is a process that goes on it happens all the time as you know even with the glaring

example of vietnam were officials leaked certain things against certain. fishel who they thought were corrupt or were on the vietcong or north side and yet went after daniel ellsberg and people like that and the irony there is ellsberg and people like that were you know exposing the type of information that these guys or women you know than they are now were using as their kind of crafted weapon so i mean you know that's the difference between journalism and journalists doing it and it being a weapon of or a tool of policy let's just say well that's why why do you think it is that the obama administration would want to continually release more and more bad information when it comes to pakistan specifically the relationship is completely soured since the obama era excuse me since the osama bin laden raid and you know it even started before that so why now would this be an opportune moment to even say if the i.s.i. is involved. well killing journalists in pakistan is like a spectator sport over there it's like football or the n.b.a.

i mean the pakistan in and of itself georgetown we had the pearl daniel pearl project and we looked at this inside and out it is a crazy situation over there is a very complex country and the relationship between our two countries has been a kin to you know codependent co violent spouses you know i love you i hate you i love you i hate you sometimes in the same breath i mean literally power. to go on each other and the military is part of that in the military runs a guy outside the i.s.i. could not be trusted in the eyes of the ministration to deal with some of bin ladin you know in our we didn't know he was there that you have a population that hates the united states as well china has a much bigger you know public relations profile over there than we do and we give them billions of dollars so it's a very complex thing you know public enemy number one it was in their country it's a it's a history of this stuff going back to the daniel pearl thing where you know the government basically put somebody who had nothing to do with killing him on trial and harming the guy you know so it's complex and i can see why these ministration

would want to do this but you have to do it and not be a hypocrite about it and there you. go about this every day if this is their attempt at being transparent well you know do you guys that that's the thing is i'm a little bit if you don't allow that will be you know a long and complicated relationship with pakistan who knows how that's going to be used against them at some point when it comes to continuing a war there as shadow war and it comes to continuing to run strikes but what role do you think of a new york times place in this right because they're in their own writing are saying the release of this information could really damage the already degrading you know that i mean you know part and parcel of this this weird leak as tool policy i think is that the media is really just shrunk away until we've had wiki leaks really up to everything this is part of their heads going to basically say look mr president we're a team player we want to you know want to pay lip service to mr. who'd been killed

or you know a fellow journalist been murdered but we also want to show that we're in the record you know there were good you know we're good players you know we're not going to leak too much we saw what happened to bradley manning we saw what happened to julian assange so you know they're trying to basically spur growth but is that a little hypocritical right because i firmly are the kind of growth. with julie. but then they turned against him and now they like to leak the information of exactly and so because they want to they want to be a two within the tool basically of helping the administration helping you to use leaks as a policy tool versus you know having them break news which is what they should be doing and they aren't what do you what do you think about the part of of course you know i've spoken out many times the fact that newspapers in this country are dying out that they can't have the same gigantic bureaus anymore they can't have the same investigative. that's the easy way out if you have friends in high places who needs your investigative owners or the stories that actually get you the headlines that

people read and by yeah basically i mean because they're probably looking i mean this is there are some parallels sold here to the pearl case they're looking at how the wall street journal really had a hard time navigating that whole murder investigation dealing with the pakistanis the former military regime or ex general who was president and the united states government having to deal with this now they just see it on the ground they can use whatever resources are there with the pakistanis they can basically take what the administration's giving them and they look like good guys because we're helping to solve some of bin ladin think these people knew he was there certain people the i.s.i. have to be punished and we're going to help the administration do it because you know we want to we want to stay on their good side so that's one of those things where of course they want to stay on the good side but also maybe they're forced to these did not force i thought on support as i. think that's the only way to keep themselves. in the game exactly while ok war on.